成唯識論述記 2.437

2.437

述曰：第二子段，正義詮同難。我亦不說絃上屈曲非不能詮，但如汝化人身、語二業非善、惡性；今大乘因俱故，如林聲說法，亦得有善等，離質化不廢通善。汝若以聲上屈曲，例同於色，不能詮表；我亦以色上屈曲，例同於聲，不生名等，既以生名不等，明知詮表亦異，色屈曲不能詮，聲屈曲許能詮，此有何過？

The Commentary states: The second sub-section, the objection showing that our correct doctrine accepts that they equally signify. I do not say that the modulations upon strings are incapable of signifying. Just as you hold that the bodily and vocal actions of an emanation (nirmita) person are neither wholesome nor unwholesome, whereas now in the Mahāyāna, because their cause is combined with [wholesome intention], like the sounds of the forest preaching the Dharma, they can also be wholesome and so forth; emanations detached from a physical base do not preclude being wholesome. If you make modulations upon sound analogous to color-form and say they cannot signify, I too will make modulations upon color-form analogous to sound and say they do not produce words; since they are unequal in producing words, it is clear that they also differ in signification. Color-form modulations cannot signify, while sound modulations are accepted as capable of signifying—what fault is there in this?